Also check out Craft's "Missing Guide for Mac Catalyst Apps" https://www.craft.do/maccatalyst-guide
"Mac Catalyst is a technology that enables you to run iOS code on macOS.."
2,997 karma · joined February 22, 2007
"Mac Catalyst is a technology that enables you to run iOS code on macOS.."
Semantics and edge conditions aside, no. I can't imagine a more important change; this is truly a concise and meaningful question. The world will be a little bit better if you ask your 3 closest peers this question.
Including semantics, I believe our language must provide a thought framework to guide intellectual curiosity towards sustainability; ie, named classes of intellectual curiosity that create more opportunity for intellectual curiosity. Further, our language must meaningfully relate the concepts of intellectual curiosity, economic productivity and capital. For example, discussing the relationship between global economic productivity and the potential of a viral pandemic could frame problems in a way that promote intellectual inquiry, incentivized by capital, to preserve future economic productivity.
Including edge conditions, I believe we at least need to constrain intellectual curiosity that would harm. Part of this goes back to semantics; ie, what is harm? But another component exists around cultural norms of transparency, regulation and authority.
The Fasting Mimicking Diet is a well studied diet that mimics the effects of fasting while eating 800-1200 calories per day and abstaining from protein (<15g/day). Check out this spreadsheet for a DIY guide to measure how fasting impacts your own biomarkers. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_f-UhsloOxvLbNLgyAou...
Dave Feldman's (engineer turned citizen scientist) independent research into the impact of low-carb, high-fat diets is also inspirational to learn first-hand how a diet can effect your body. He's replicated experiments of how several dietary approaches, including fasting, affect the lab measurement of cholesterol levels. He's been able to reproduce findings on his own body, with small sample sizes of other dieters. He's even proposed a Lipid Energy Model to describe how fats distribute energy to cells in a way that matches the data he's collected. https://cholesterolcode.com/model/
Reading enough of this research, I start to think about context-dependent metabolic pathways that can be triggered with inputs as simple as varied macronutrients. It feels like a very meaningful frame to interpret research about diet and longevity.
https://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/technologies/taylor_more.h...
This Economist article only scratches the surface of the risk of accelerating technology development. Schmachtenberger provides a framework for thought and much deeper insights in this direction.
https://impacttheory.libsyn.com/conversations-with-tom-danie...
Without doubt, eusocial insects represent some of the most successful species on the planet from a biomass perspective. At the same time, if you study the evolution of these species, you won't be motivated to "be a bee".
One way to describe the very complex multi-adaptation evolution in brief: wasp egg dumpers, over generations had the tables turned; host wasps started charging rent, then enslaving younger generations; some of the wasps started cloning their slaves, even breeding these clones for specialized roles.
Its a really interesting topic to dive into. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_eusociality
[1] https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/166520v8.full, 2019
These thinkers propose a common constraint for stagnant growth in education and medicine: a philosophy of science. There is much more to it, and unfortunately it's not a concise explanation. However, I find this conceptual frame much stronger than the education/medicine problem "commonalities" described by Zuck, Collison and Cowen. Further, the "Game A" insight seems to predict the shortcomings of an applied meta-approach of "the tool-building which comes from having the experience building engineering teams."
Game A: ("hill climbing") invest in better microscopy tools, even though "right now, the actual technology of microscopes is ahead of scientists’ ability to process the data".
Game B: ("valley crossing") invest in a philosophy of science to better understand complexity management, causality and sense-making in the domains of education and medicine.
"And as engineers.. you really want to get into the code and step through it to see where the thing is breaking down" (Zuck). But whats 'broken' at FB? is it a server infrastructure? monetization? or is it interpersonal psychology of user relationships? Mistaking our tools' observation for reality, and optimizing for only what we can measure can build profits, but it has limits to make sense of complexity - and undefined/unmanaged complexity is common to the nature of education/medicine problems.
I've enjoyed Bruce Damer's explanation of related theory, "The Hot Spring Hypothesis for the Origin of Life". Search "goldilocks chemistry" for some helpful background and visualizations on this page - https://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com/the-hot-spring-hyp...
Sure, but what is exactly is "evidence"? The word is used as if observational data has no ambiguity or subjectivity is the way it is defined.
The book, Range (Epstein), had a great example of this in discussing the Challenger explosion in the last chapter.
The premise: several engineering teams in Nasa had a working theory/model about O-ring susceptibility to cold whether. However, their model was not backed up by the evidence available. Nasa made the call to launch based on data alone.
Why? the evidence collected for decision-making was incomplete and poorly presented. Range presents a thesis that over-reliance on a quantitative thinking can lead to optimization of the wrong thing and actually inhibits learning.
Related, "The Challenger: An Information Disaster" https://www.asktog.com/books/challengerExerpt.html - Tufte’s re-examination of the Challenger disaster.
Also see - https://www.trutv.com/shows/adam-ruins-everything/blog/adams...
Some reading in this direction:
"How Hume and Mach Helped Einstein Find Special Relativity", Norton
"Range", Epstein. Ch 1 discusses Bool's influence on Shannon for the discovery of information theory. Ch 5 includes anecdotes and research for "Thinking Outside Experience", including the methods of analogy used by Keppler regarding theories of planetary motion.
> Then there was this pragmatic turn, where the dominant mode of physics became anti-foundational, anti-philosophy.
Related papers:
"Analytic and Continental Philosophy, Science, and Global Philosophy", Tieszen
"Kant and the Foundations of Analytic Philosophy", Hanna
~Charles Darwin, in a letter to Joseph Hooker (1871)
I heard researcher Bruce Damer explain how Darwin was likely correct in this letter. As we understand it today, enzymes and oxygen would prevent a second biological genesis. Also, there is less "feed stock" of star dust falling on our present warm little ponds. https://www.mindpodnetwork.com/future-fossils-109/
"domestication syndrome is a byproduct of changes to the NCC migration pattern" in the development of the neural crest. In this scenario, Seratonin inhibits the Negative Valence System, in turn giving domesticated hominids a longer window of time to collect social information to determine how to apply aggression towards other animals.
NCC migration patterns are also suspected to change facial characteristics, part of neural crest development, that are observed in domesticated animals: hair, ears, mouth, teeth, etc.
How do children determine who to pay attention to? who to learn from? 1. Skill / Competence ("whose arrows hit the target?") 2. Success ("who brings back the big prey?") 3. Prestige (cues of attention, deference) - use what other people are doing - they are worthy of paying attention to 4. Age (ie, scaffold to incrementally experience) 5. Self-similarity - what might be useful to you later? - males copy males, females copy females, etc
Rhonda Patrick interviews Dr Guido Kroemer, an expert in Autophagy. Its one of the most accessible, well-referenced and thorough discussions on Autophagy (including Mitophagy), that I've come across.
Other methane discoveries in solar system [2]:
- 2004, methane was discovered in the Martian atmosphere by M.J. Mumma of NASA's Goddard Flight Center
- 2004, martian atmosphere finding verified by the Mars Express Orbiter
- 2005, Titan's atmosphere by the Huygens probe
- 2015, the Cassini orbiter spacecraft on discovered the Enceladus (Saturn's moon) plume which has all the ingredients for methanogenesis-based life forms to feed from. Suggested hot water is interacting with rock beneath the sea.
- 2017, new findings of Enceladus plume support that conclusion and add that the rock appears to be reacting chemically.
- 2018, NASA disclosed in a press conference that its Curiosity rover had documented seasonal fluctuations of atmospheric methane levels on Mars.
When Duplex is presented, the researchers do not communicate the domains where the research is reproducible, and where it is not. There is not theory that describes what domains can gain utility.
It seems like the obvious outcome of presenting research, without a theory that the audience can understand, is that the research will be misunderstood. Press narratives are required to latch onto this every time there are eyeballs on an AI demo: "Turing Test?", "Ethical Questions?", "Job Loss?", "How advanced is AI?", etc.
In terms of a "goal that might validate advance", I think a theory that helps others to understand the limits of the research. When other researchers, beneficiaries of the technology, and the press understand the real scope of the research it reduces the need for critique like OP.
In 2004 the enzyme PARP-1 was linked to long-term memory in Aplysia[1]. In 2009 another study claimed that PARP-1 was also required long-term memory in Mammals[2]:
"Previous results linked the activation of PARP‐1 with long‐term memory formation during learning in the marine mollusk Aplysia (Science 2004, 304:1820–1822).. Mice were tested in two learning paradigms, object recognition and fear conditioning.. These findings implicate PARP‐1 activation in molecular processes underlying long‐term memory formation during learning."
Another study of mice "demonstrated that augmentation of the stability of pro-inflammatory mediator mRNAs presenting a regulatory mechanism of PARP1 in gene expression at the post-transcriptional level".[3]
[1] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/304/5678/1820 [2] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1471-4159.... [3] https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14632
Metazoa (760mya) - "animal multicellularity (gene regulation, signalling, cell adhesion, and cell cycle)"
Eumetazoa (760-680mya) - "Characteristics of eumetazoans include true tissues organized into germ layers, the presence of neurons, and an embryo that goes through a gastrula stage." [1]
Planulozoa (680mya) - "A 2004 study investigated the relationships between biradial and bilateral animals in evolution. If biradial is the link between radial and bilateral, then would seem to suggest that bilateralism occurred before cephalization. Called the Planulozoa Hypothesis, the authors suggests that ctenophora are the sister clade of bilateralians, and that all three of the groups – cnidarians, ctenophora and bilaterals – are the descendents of a single bilateral ancestor." [2,3]
Bilateria (650mya) - "A Hox system is thought to have arisen (indicated by a red bar) after the divergence of the cnidarians from the common ancestor that gave rise to bilaterian animals (ecdysozoans, lophotrophozoans and deuterostomes)." [4]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eumetazoa [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planulozoa [3] http://biologicalexceptions.blogspot.com/2015/02/mirroring-e... [4] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096098220... [5] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3003/cc4844fe878fbe00167da6... - list of gene adaptations by LCA.
The book is set around 1660, as the center of the scientific universe shifted from Italy to England. Interestingly, the formation of the Royal Society occurred in the midst of the English Civil war. Not only economic forces, but military forces and political forces had a dramatic impact on shaping what became the formalization of of the scientific method, and peer review process.
Consider that the very existence of Oxford (and other universities) hung on the arbitrary conceptions of military generals and the political implications of their decisions.
On the other hand, average investor feedback does not create a learning opportunity for entrepreneurs who are pitching. Smile f-ing, and backdoor calls to other investors is the language of pitch feedback. It creates a dichotomy where many entrepreneurs feel everyone else is embellishing and investors can't give feedback with candor in any case. Therefor, an internal narrative comes to life that its rational, and even in shareholder's best interest, ie, a duty of a CEO, to stretch the truth in a way that gets the company the resources it needs.
I think a better dream would be if FB open-sourced an advertisement-free Facebook, and provided $1B in grants to build permutations of the UI that all sync data.
"Venture capitalist Tim Draper, an old family friend of Theranos founder and CEO Elizabeth Holmes, who led an early $1 million investment into the company (split between two investment firms).."
This type of "science" journalism is everything that is wrong with the intersection of media and research. Funding aside, the researchers are isolating a non-transparent, non-reproducible data finding, out of context, and feeding it to the press. On the other hand, the press is reporting this finding, and weighting believability upon credential, instead of reasoning. The head researcher of the article even lists his key credentials as follows: "..His work has been covered in numerous popular press articles..". Good, informative, transparent research? who cares, credentials are accumulating.
The output is statistical nonsense. Its a complete waste of time for anyone looking for real information, because the findings are not contextualized in any meaningful way. The article does not come close to offering apples-apples comparisons of other surveys that would give the reader a working understanding of the economic dynamic it talks about.
I'm so confident that the findings are meaningless because I used to own several businesses where I hired 100s of professional drivers. It would be easy to manufacture results like this $3.37 "median" finding. Many drivers in any given year start and quit with no idea of what the job entails or the economics, yes, even when you tell them explicitly up front. I've seen first-time drivers that want to use vehicles that get 12 mpg. Some drivers just shouldn't be drivers; they can't navigate, avoid traffic, or follow basic instructions. Many drivers aren't ready to treat the situation as a business with a profit and cost center - it's not trivial to quantify costs, and many people don't think that way at all. Also, some new drivers that might make good drivers, take some time to learn. They can take a while to work into a rotation and earn more lucrative rides. Also, many drivers take time to understand the principle that some times of day are busier and they will make more money during that time.
Context matters, a lot.
Also, I frequently ask Lyft / Uber drivers what they make. In many different cities. Its all about the same as I used to see in my businesses. It's not magic, the drivers who stick with it understand the system and make anywhere from nominally above minimum wage to maybe 3X minimum wage for the most capable and most opportunistic drivers.
The basic economics of professional contract drivers has been about the same for dozens of years. I'd speculate what might have changed, if anything, is that Lyft / Uber have normalized driving as a profession, and have strong brands that attract more people. Maybe that results in higher churn rates than the industry has ever seen. That would actually be really interesting if a university researched that trend and explained it through quality scientific journalism.
I feel journalists who are serious about presenting research findings will provide: 1) a complete and transparent understanding of the methodology of the findings, 2) impartial reviews from believable research peers, 3) a concrete and thorough description of the context of the finding. This seems like a minimum journalistic standard. It shouldn't be good enough to point to a dude associated with MIT and say "this dude says this thing so <press narrative>". If journalists rely upon credential, without reasoning, to assert truth, its just manipulation hiding behind assumed pedigree.